Search citation statements
Paper Sections
Citation Types
Year Published
Publication Types
Relationship
Authors
Journals
Introduction IV-thrombolysis is established in the unknown or extended time window based on multimodal imaging. Further, increasing evidence exists regarding IV-thrombolysis in patients on oral anticoagulation including direct oral anticoagulants (DOAC). However, data on IV-thrombolysis in ischemic stroke patients on oral anticoagulation with unknown time of stroke onset is sparse. Methods This study bases on the longitudinal cohort study Stroke Research Consortium in Northern Bavaria (STAMINA; ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04357899). Acute ischemic stroke patients treated with iv-thrombolysis (IVT) in the unknown or extended time window from January 2015 to December 2019 were included. Patient selection based on multimodal CT or MRI. Patients on oral anticoagulation (vitamin-K antagonist (VKA) or DOAC within 48 hours) were eligible for IV-thrombolysis based on INR-measurement (VKA) or plasma levels (DOAC) according to an institutional protocol. Primary outcomes were the incidence of any and symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage. Results Of 170 ischemic stroke patients treated with IV-thrombolysis in the unknown or extended time window, 151 had no oral anticoagulation at stroke onset and 19 were on oral anticoagulation (6 on vitamin-K antagonist (VKA) and 13 on direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC)). The risk of symptomatic ICH according to ECASS II criteria was similar between the patients with and without oral anticoagulation (1 (5.3%) vs. 4 (2.7%); p=0.453). After adjustment for confounding factors pre-medication with oral anticoagulation was not associated with symptomatic ICH (aOR 1.02 (0.09 – 11.02); p=0.988). Conclusion IV-thrombolysis for ischemic stroke with unknown onset appeared safe in selected patients on oral anticoagulation with both DOAC and VKA.
Introduction IV-thrombolysis is established in the unknown or extended time window based on multimodal imaging. Further, increasing evidence exists regarding IV-thrombolysis in patients on oral anticoagulation including direct oral anticoagulants (DOAC). However, data on IV-thrombolysis in ischemic stroke patients on oral anticoagulation with unknown time of stroke onset is sparse. Methods This study bases on the longitudinal cohort study Stroke Research Consortium in Northern Bavaria (STAMINA; ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04357899). Acute ischemic stroke patients treated with iv-thrombolysis (IVT) in the unknown or extended time window from January 2015 to December 2019 were included. Patient selection based on multimodal CT or MRI. Patients on oral anticoagulation (vitamin-K antagonist (VKA) or DOAC within 48 hours) were eligible for IV-thrombolysis based on INR-measurement (VKA) or plasma levels (DOAC) according to an institutional protocol. Primary outcomes were the incidence of any and symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage. Results Of 170 ischemic stroke patients treated with IV-thrombolysis in the unknown or extended time window, 151 had no oral anticoagulation at stroke onset and 19 were on oral anticoagulation (6 on vitamin-K antagonist (VKA) and 13 on direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC)). The risk of symptomatic ICH according to ECASS II criteria was similar between the patients with and without oral anticoagulation (1 (5.3%) vs. 4 (2.7%); p=0.453). After adjustment for confounding factors pre-medication with oral anticoagulation was not associated with symptomatic ICH (aOR 1.02 (0.09 – 11.02); p=0.988). Conclusion IV-thrombolysis for ischemic stroke with unknown onset appeared safe in selected patients on oral anticoagulation with both DOAC and VKA.
Endovascular mechanical thrombectomy (EVT) drastically reduces disability after acute ischemic stroke due to large‐vessel occlusion, but only a small proportion of patients with stroke are eligible for this powerful treatment. Several ongoing studies are aiming to expand the indications for EVT to further reduce disability after acute ischemic stroke for a larger proportion of patients suffering from large‐vessel occlusion stroke. Patients with preexisting disability, comprising ≈30% of all patients with acute ischemic stroke, were universally excluded from the landmark clinical trials that established EVT efficacy. These patients disproportionally suffer from accumulated disability after stroke, with substantial societal and economic impact. Further, there is significant heterogeneity in current practice of EVT among patients with preexisting disability. Establishing evidence‐based acute stroke treatments for this population is a priority. In this narrative review, we summarize the current literature regarding EVT in patients with preexisting disability. While doing so, we highlight key concepts regarding statistical analysis and discuss opportunities and challenges for future studies focusing on this vulnerable population.
Background Endovascular thrombectomy (EVT) has been proven effective in anterior circulation stroke due to large vessel occlusion (LVO). However, translation from randomized clinical trials (RCTs) with highly selected patients to real-world requires confirmation, particularly to identify associations outside of strict selection criteria. Aims This study aims to compare functional outcomes after EVT in real-world with those reported in RCTs, and to identify associations with functional outcome after EVT outside RCT-criteria. Methods This study analyzed longitudinal German real-world data from the Stroke Research Consortium in Northern Bavaria (STAMINA) cohort from January, 2015 to June, 2019. We conducted a trial emulation, comparing patients with anterior circulation stroke and LVO meeting selection criteria for RCTs investigating EVT (1) predominantly within 6 hours with those from HERMES meta-analysis, and (2) within 6-24 hours with those from AURORA meta-analysis. We (3) analyzed treatment effects of EVT and association with functional outcome in patients treated outside RCT criteria. Results Of 598 patients, 281 (47.0%) met RCT-criteria for treatment within 6 hours (hereinafter STAMINA-HERMES), 74 (12.4%) met RCT-criteria for treatment within 6–24 hours (STAMINA-AURORA), and 277 (46.3%) patients received EVT outside RCT-criteria. We observed no difference in rates of functional independence or mortality, comparing STAMINA-HERMES with HERMES meta-analysis (mRS 0-1: n=120/281 [43%] vs. 291/633 [46%], p=0.36; mortality: n=34/281 [12%] vs. 97/633 [15%], p=0.20), and STAMINA-AURORA with AURORA meta-analysis (mRS 0-1: n=26/74 [35%] vs. 122/266 [46%], p=0.10, mortality: n=10/74 [14%] vs. 45/266 [17%], p=0.48). Patients treated outside RCT-criteria had worse outcome (mRS 0-1: n=38/277 [14%], mortality: n=90/277 [32%], both p<0.001); possibly driven by pre-existing functional dependence (n=172/277 [62%]). Compared to matched controls, EVT outside of RCT-criteria was associated with lower mortality (absolute treatment effect: -14%, 95% Confidence Interval [CI] -23 to -5, p<0.01), but not with recovery to functional independence or premorbid functional status (treatment effect: 4%, CI -4 to 11, p=0.34), which was associated with lower NIHSS (Odds ratio [OR] 0.86, CI 0.80-0.92, p<0.001) and age (OR 0.95, CI 0.93-0.98, p=0.002). Conclusions Translation of EVT outcomes reported in RCTs into real-world is possible, however, almost half of patients did not meet trial criteria. Identification of patients who functionally benefit from frequently performed EVT outside RCT-criteria requires further investigation. Trial registration Clinicaltrials.gov, NCT04357899.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.